Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS lens - Opinions ?

[Marlyn]

Howdy,

Looking for any real world feedback on this lens,  The new   "Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF Lens" specifically in a Canon mount, on a Pro (1 series) body.  (I use a 1dsIII, and 1dIV)
I'm only interested in the new OS/DG one, not the older ones.

I'm not so interested feedback on harpness etc, as by all accounts that is just fine, but more on its 'usebility' as a Birding and wildlife lens, both without, and with a teleconverter attached. 
so Focus speed, focus accuracy, tracking, yada yada.

Hows the focus speed and tracking, especially in AI-Servo mode against a moving target (animal, person, etc).
Hows it handle ?  Zoom and Focus smooth ?

Hows it go with Canon teleconverters.     Any preference of the canon ones vs the Sigma ones ?  (I have  2 sets of Canon converters,  Mk II and Mk III, would rather not carry others as well).



Any oppinions from anyone with one,  canon or nikon mount (though canon is my usage), would be greatly appreciated.

Regards

Mark.

[fotometria gr]

Howdy,

Looking for any real world feedback on this lens,  The new   "Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM AF Lens" specifically in a Canon mount, on a Pro (1 series) body.  (I use a 1dsIII, and 1dIV)
I'm only interested in the new OS/DG one, not the older ones.

I'm not so interested feedback on harpness etc, as by all accounts that is just fine, but more on its 'usebility' as a Birding and wildlife lens, both without, and with a teleconverter attached. 
so Focus speed, focus accuracy, tracking, yada yada.

Hows the focus speed and tracking, especially in AI-Servo mode against a moving target (animal, person, etc).
Hows it handle ?  Zoom and Focus smooth ?

Hows it go with Canon teleconverters.     Any preference of the canon ones vs the Sigma ones ?  (I have  2 sets of Canon converters,  Mk II and Mk III, would rather not carry others as well).



Any oppinions from anyone with one,  canon or nikon mount (though canon is my usage), would be greatly appreciated.

Regards

Mark.

The older lens is said to be the same performance. I've used it quite a lot, its a good lens (the 300mm f2.8 is even better) and surprisingly good with Sigma's own tc's (especially the1.4x), f2.8 is visibly softer than f4, it can be considered usable for some users (IMO only just), it's really sharp from f4. However, the lens is really 275mm at the long end and its not really an f2.8 but rather an f3.2. The later also apply for the slightly better S300/2.8. You may want to consider the 100-300 f4. That one is an f4 and is 300 at the long end and its really sharp at all aperture! It also works well with the 1.4 tc, with a2x it looses AF. As far as usability is concerned, the 300/2.8 and the 100/300f4 are much more usable, in fact the 300 f2,8 (which is 280/f3.0) is the most usable fast tele on the market, you can hand hold the bloody thing even with the 2x on! The 120/300 is much more front balanced, it can be usable handheld, but it will bring fatigue earlier and you do need to shift shutter. I've tried them all on Nikon and AF was more than fast enough even with the 1.4tc on, so I can't comment on the rest you ask. Cheers, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr

[stever]

if you're really interested, you should read the lensrentals.com and then rent from them for a trial if you're still interested

[Marlyn]

I would, and do, except they don't have one as yet. (Still comming)

I research in several places, but what the folks have said here on Lu-Lu over the years has proved one of the more reliable and honest with regards what works and what dosn't.

The range, speed, weight, and zoom ticks all my other requirments so just looking if its up to scratch performance wise, if anyone else actually has one.
Intended main use is a birding flight photography lens on a canon 1dIV or 1dsIII, or safarai lens on same cameras, or 60D.

Just hoping someone here might actually have one.

Regards

Mark.

[Ian99]

For what it is worth, here are comments I made on NikonGear about the previous version of this lens – the non-OS version. AF failed right out of the box. It seemed that the whole of that production run had AF problems. I was given a loaner, then a replacement from a new batch. I like the final one.
…….

“I think it is very difficult to give an overall rating for this lens as the quality from Sigma is so variable -- you can get one that is spectacular or one that does not focus at all, which is outrageous for something aimed at the pro sports market at about USD2500 at B&H.

The good side is that there is nothing similar by any other maker. If you need 300m F2.8 zoom, then it is the only game in town. Add a teleconverter ( I use a 1.4 Kenko) and with the crop factor you have the equivalent angle of view of a 600 F4 at a quarter of the price.

Do not under any circumstances buy this thing without having unlimited exchange privileges as you may well have to use them. This is not a candidate for mail order, just go to your very friendly local store and be frank.

I think the optical formula has been the same for at least 6 years, other than the addition of "digital coatings" in the latest DG version. What has changed has been firstly the beefed up tripod collar which is removable and works well, and the DG coatings plus some external cosmetics.

Web comments are quite variable and Fred Miranda's site has quite a few, but mostly for the Canon mount. They vary from spectacular to crap with repeated comments about the AF motor failing. There have been some comments about lack of contrast. My experience with three lenses has been that with two of them the contrast appeared quite good, but the third and my keeper is very good.

I had the opportunity to do an indirect comparison with the Nikon 500 P and I like the Sigma better. I should add that this was with my second copy, a loaner lens, not my third the keeper.

It is heavy at 6lbs, but that is to be expected for F2.8. It is not a lens to hand hold for very long. The external coating is soft and marks easily. OOF areas show up as sharp multiple images -- not very attractive. Focusing manually is very fast and I suspect that this may have something to do with the AF failures.

Using AF from near to far focus ends up with a solid clunk from the lens and some visible vibration. There is a lot of mass moving inside this thing and perhaps the stops are inadequate. Anyway my first copy failed out of the box, as did three others I know of. The tech admitted that the whole batch had a problem and I had to wait for a brand new batch to be made. Previous AF problems seemed to be mount specific, with Nikons being more prone to faults than Canons, but this latest problem was not brand specific.

Bottom line is that I really like the one I have but would find it difficult to recommend the lens without the exchange privileges mentioned earlier.

It seems to have a home amongst sports photographers who need the zoom and the wide aperture. I use it for shooting performances in the low light conditions of theatres and churches for which it works very well.”

Ian